SEO Class in Chicago, IL
Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?
More SEO Content
Multible Inbound/ Outbound Links
Posted 28 July 2011 - 01:36 PM
So a company has pitched to me a link trade proposal. I want to explain it as briefly as possible here and I hope to get feedback on this.
They have three websites, all w/ less traffic than mine. Because of the difference in traffic, they agreed to linking to my site more than I'd link to their sites.
They want me to link to 2 of their websites on 60 content-appropriate pages on my site (what i mean by content appropriate: on 60 of my state pages, they want to be linked to their state pages).
In return they will link 100 times to my site, again, on content relevant pages, of their third site.
Is this a bad idea for SEO? I mean, it's all relevant, there are festivals on my state pages, and their sites deal with Bed and Breakfasts and private hotels around the country. They are trying to increase their page rank.
I just wanted to do a little research before agreeing to this trade. If you have questions, please ask. hope i made sense!!
Posted 28 July 2011 - 01:45 PM
Posted 28 July 2011 - 03:53 PM
If all you're getting for your links are links in return from a company that is obviously swapping links with anyone it can hornswaggle into doing that, you're going to see a negative return on your investment.
Posted 29 July 2011 - 09:08 AM
How are links not an endorsement? That's the epitome of what a link is (supposed to be).
Posted 29 July 2011 - 09:39 AM
It's so many outbound links to them (they are returning the favor in greater numbers), so I wasn't sure if that looked like crappy-spammy-linkfarmy-SEO to the spiders, when really i will put a lot of human thought into 1st!!
Appreciate your thoughts.
Posted 29 July 2011 - 03:53 PM
If it looks crappy spammy linkfarmy to you, then it's likely it does to the search engines. If not, then not.
Posted 03 August 2011 - 11:31 AM
The question really is, who's getting the most out of the deal? If you are, great. If they are, well then it needs rethinking.
Links are about quality, not quantity remember.
Posted 03 August 2011 - 12:22 PM
Missed this previously.
There is absolutely no support for the point of view that a link is an endorsement. That was just a bit of nonsense cooked up by Larry Page and Sergey Brin before they learned what the Web is really like. All the generally supported technical specifications for hypertextual linking lack direction for indicating sentiment.
Links are connectors, nothing more. They do not convey sentiment and hence cannot be construed as endorsements.
The United States Government specifically disclaims all links as endorsements on its Websites, and no U.S. court (or any court of which I am aware) has published an opinion or ruling stating that links between Websites constitute endorsements.
People link to Websites they disagree with all the time. People link to Websites they are unsure about all the time. Those links will never be endorsements. Hence, by nature, no link is an endorsement.
Posted 03 August 2011 - 01:35 PM
Posted 03 August 2011 - 04:07 PM
I agree with you. MANY links are endorsements. Problem is, search engines cannot tell the difference. I think Google's experiments with authorship ("rel='author'" and "rel='me'") attributes will help smooth the path toward other ways of qualifying links. "rel='nofollow'" doesn't really convey sentiment and really just takes a link out of the graph. They need to incorporate intent into the graph.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users